Hot answers tagged

13

It's technically (almost) correct, but obviously a pathological case for the fun of it. Moving the prepositions into their "standard" positions and adding the appropriate pronouns gives: For what [reason] did you bring that book about 'Down Under', out of which I don't want you to read to me, up [here]? That is, from back to front: for refers to what ...


8

In both cases, that is the That-Complementizer, a marker for a tensed Noun Clause, or Complement. In the first case, both that's are proper, since the repetition marks the two tensed complements that are conjoined by and, thus avoiding ambiguity, which is always a problem in a clause like this. In the second case, the construction so Adj that S/such a NP ...


6

It is not required to put a comma after a dependent clause, and some writers don't. Here are two examples from journalists writing in today's Guardian newspaper: Unless the public gets angry enough to force a rethink we had better hope that at least the computer stays risk-averse. Every time a "periodic" falls off the wagon they hit the ground ...


6

The object of deny is any full reality. The word change is being used as a noun, and is the object of the preposition to, which indicates whose claim is being denied. (Note that this in not an instance of the infinitive to change.) So this: Classical ontology denies any full reality to change. Basically means: Classical ontology denies that change ...


6

You are starting from a false premise if you believe that there is a position where the preposition "is supposed to be", particularly if you think that the correct position is "at the end of the sentence" (called preposition stranding). Indeed, there are some people who regard this as an error. In fact, the position of the pronoun in relative constructions ...


5

A run-on sentence is one in which two or more independent clauses are joined without correct punctuation or without the use of a conjunction. The sentence in the example is not a run-on sentence. It has only one independent clause. The milk having soured is an introductory participial phrase and is correctly followed by a comma. Here's an example of a ...


5

It is okay, but can be potentially confusing/surprising for some people. In this particular sentence, you can do "I've been looking for this for a long time" or "For a long time, this is what I've been looking for".


5

You could always break it up into separate sentences (if it's important enough to leave parentheses): It's widely known that the name "JavaScript" is trademarked by Oracle. The name was formerly a trademark of Sun (and before that a trademark of Netscape). If you don't like that, you might try putting it into a chronological list: It's widely known ...


5

First, it's not a hyphen; it's an em dash. We use it for: Aposiopesis: where a sentence is ended suddenly because the speaker is too emotional or can't think of the right way to express something or just— A stronger break than parentheses—inserting a clause in the middle of another though—but remaining with the same sentence. Showing a change of thought, ...


5

I'm not a native speaker, but the way I learnt it, it should be ".. if I went with him".


4

You seem to be misunderstanding the makeup of the sentence. It is not made up of [subject] [was that] [independent clause] Rather, it is: [subject] [copula] [dependent clause] In other words, was that is not a constituent that belongs together. The verb ‘to be’ is a copula (also known as a ‘linking verb’) that basically functions like an equals sign: ...


4

Second, it's not a sentence. What's the subject, what's the verb? It's a complex adjective phrase (i.e, a reduced disjoined restrictive relative clause), with a couple of descriptive similes attached, after being introduced by like, like most similes. The whole apparatus might well be what one would put after This thing here [pointing] is ...


4

This sort of thing is surprisingly common in English. I couldn't decide if I had had a good time. This is what I've been looking for for a long time. (Your original example.) There's nothing wrong with these sentences, and they aren't grammatically incorrect. However, some people do find them infelicitous or awkward-sounding, so a simple rewording ...


4

As Phoog says, your terminology is a bit off, but your style looks absolutely fine to me, though it is hard to tell without proper content (or content that I can understand). While very complex sentences may be be easier to follow if the main clause comes first, your sentences are readable enough. Your clauses and phrases that precede the main clause are not ...


3

I'll break it down to short sentences and rephrase: For simple examples, the overhead of concurrency is likely to be far larger than the actual computation. - Therefore, solving this example problem concurrently will have far worse performance than solving it with a single thread. - Multi-thread code is also more confusing to read than ...


3

It is correct, although this phrasing has a rather formal and old-fashioned sound. If you are looking for something that sounds more like casual spoken English, you might say: It is a subject I could talk about for hours.


3

What was formerly a trademark of Netscape? Sun? It is widely known that the name Javascript is a trademark now the property of Oracle but once owned by Sun (a trademark registered by Netscape). Oracle? It is widely known that the name Javascript is a trademark of Oracle (which is itself a trademark of Netscape, later owned by Sun). JavaScript? ...


3

The word "something" in this context refers to an action. Specifically, an action that the author is not permitting. Even more specifically, the author was praised for not permitting that action to occur.


3

In your examples either can be correct with some small changes ... a. The degree of dependence on nuclear energy varies from country to country. b. How dependent countries are on nuclear energy varies. a. How books are read varies from person to person. b. The way books are read varies from person to person.


3

A material holding in a company might mean one of two things:- It could be a shareholding that is sufficiently large as to allow the holder considerable influence over the company. If I owned 30% of the shares in ACME Plc, the management of that company would have to pay attention to my views on investment decisions, which they wouldn't have to do if I ...


3

'Available' is part of an adjectival clause 'that is available for all sectors'. The 'that is' is unnecessary and is omitted. 'Available' could be put in a different position e.g. 'There isn't sufficient available data, for all sectors, .....'. But it is quite normal for such a clause to be placed after the noun which it qualifies. Please note a couple of ...


3

In this type of sentence, where you have one adjective in front of the noun and another after the noun, the latter is used predicatively, which means it is connected both to the subject (like an adjective) and to the verb (like an adverb). It is similar to sentences with subject complements, such as enough details were available. The word available is also a ...


3

It's okay, but perhaps not what you mean. You perhaps mean: He would go to the theater if I went with him. The would clause is conditional, but the clause used to give the condition is not itself in the conditional mood. We might use your form if we had another reason for using would, like a double conditional: If it wasn't raining, I would go to ...


3

Switch "are" and "either" and it should be fine, because then you have three clauses that are all describe qualities of the book.


3

I've seen this expressed as "with over 80 combined years in marketing".


3

A complex sentence has more than one clause, and a clause requires a subject and verb. "At her age" is a prepositional phrase, which doesn't contain a verb, so your sentence remains simple. Conjunctions may be omitted. Punctuation may take their place: Minggay Awok was lonely; her only companions were a few charcoal black chickens. His business ...


2

I believe complex sentences don't always need a conjunction. For example, the sentence which precedes this one is conjunctionless yet complex.


2

It's OK. But your explanation sentence is much better in terms of brevity and zest. "The first country you explore should be your own." That's a nice succinct thought. To improve your original sentence, I would word it this way: "I think that every country has its own beauty, but your own country is the first you should explore."


2

As written, this is a simple sentence because it doesn't contain any dependent clauses. Examples of a complex sentence are as follows. Because my coffee was too cold, I heated it in the microwave. Though he was very rich, he was still very unhappy. She returned the computer after she noticed it was damaged. When the cost goes up, customers ...


2

I have received further confirmation that India and France will attend the debate. In the analysis below I put the syntactic functions in bold. The categories of the individual words and phrases are in brackets. We need to be careful in our analysis not to mix up syntactic functions such as subject, with categories of word such as noun. Matrix clause: ...



Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible